/ck/ - Food & Cooking

Also can't wait to drink this up again. Phenomenal on draft.

>>11646250

How is Bell's Brown Ale? Meant to get some today but they were out so I got picrelated instead

>>11646515
I'm not too big on it, but I'm not much of a brown ale kinda guy. I thought it was too malty even for it's style.

>>11646515
How does Old Chub compare to Dirty Bastard?

>tfw in the states for a while
>can't get beer without paying some smug asshole extra for it

>>11646250
Suffer on this fresh can of based goodness, my dude.

>>11646592
You can buy carlsberg in the states you dirty euro faggot.

>>11646592
What are you talking about?

>>11646616
What's it hopped with?

>>11646642
Brewed with Belma, Centennial, and Mosaic hops.

>Local bottle shop gives me a "deal" on a can of Heady Topper for 5 dollars.

I mean it's really good, but it's pretty similar to some of the stuff that's brewed locally in my area.

>>11646515
Bells brown is okay enough. Nothing exciting

>>11646712

Belma is fucking shit. It's a complete waste of time brewing with it. Tastes of nothing and has shit bittering qualities. Fuck Belma.

>>11647634
>>11646583
>>11646515
Which sucks for me, Bell's in my favorite brewery.
>inb4 Bell's is overrated
I don't really care if people find it overrated, they're solid and consistent.

Beer has hops which is more estrogenic than soy
Is Mead a better alternitve

>>11648561
>drink alcohol

>im worried about my health!!!

>>11648567
most evidence suggests moderate alcohol consumption is healthy, no evidence suggests hops are made of soy or whatever shit

>>11646592
>>can't get beer without paying some smug asshole extra for it
what does this even mean?

>>11648581
Depends on how you mean healthy. A drink a day at the very least has few if any benefits. Hops are phytoestrogen heavy but this isn’t an issue if you’re not drinking 20 quadruple IPAs a week

>>11648604
There is no evidence that any amount of hops has any biological effect

>>11648604
>A drink a day at the very least has few if any benefits
You have to average about 4 drinks per day for a man, and 2 or 3 for a woman before deleterious effects are measurable. Most evidence suggests averaging one per day is healthier than abstaining entirely

>>11648616
Actually there is

>>11648626
Such as?

>>11648622
The most comprehensive meta analysis on the subject released this yesr found that one drink a day was simply neutral, not beneficial, the only benefits you get from drinking are some minuscule antioxidants and polyphenols which are mostly negated by the alcohol itself

>>11648630
Claims with no evidence can be dismissed without evidence

>>11648632
You also have to keep in mind that many craft beers are filled with yeasty nutrients that are filtered out of macro beers typically referenced.

>>11648637
How can I provide evidence for there not being evidence of something? You are the one making a claim, not me. There is no evidence for your claim that hops have some special deleterious biological effect

>>11648561
>Work at liquor store
>Only people I see buy mead is overweight metal heads and wanna be vikings

No

>>11648650
>make an outstanding claim

>have absolutely nothing to support it

>w-well thats just not fair!!! i have more work to do!!!

Not my problem

>You are the one making a claim
So what is “there is no evidence of proestrogenic activity from hops”?

>There is no evidence for your claim that hops have some special deleterious biological effect
>You are the one making a claim, not me
Lol this fucking moron

>>11648667
yeah, you made the claim tho

>>11648685
Saying there is no evidence for something is a claim, there is no singular claim here. I didn’t even make the original point about estrogen in hops. Sorry about your Asperger’s sweetie

>>11648667
Link us to a source that clearly states drinking IPAs causes men to grow titties and wear fedoras and you won't get pushback on your ridiculous assertions.

>>11648693
>Posts that hops are made of soy and turn you into a lady or something
>Response points out there is not evidence of that
>no, you have to prove there is no evidence of this claim I made without support of evidence

You don't see how this make you look like an idiot?

>>11648708
>Link us to a source that clearly states drinking IPAs causes men to grow titties and wear fedoras and you won't get pushback on your ridiculous assertions.
Where did I make anything remotely close to that assertion? All I said was hops were loaded with phytoestrogens and that they had generally fuck all effect here >>11648604

The only reason im receiving pushback because you’re all insecure dichotomizing faggots

>>11648710
>Posts that hops are made of soy and turn you into a lady
Nope. See above. And see the post here >>11648693
I didn’t make the original claim nor did I support the entirety of it

Your stupidity and inability to support your argument is not my problem

>>11648745
Oh so if you say it was another guy that made the ridiculous and unfounded claim, it becomes my responsibility to prove that there is no evidence for that totally not your claim?

Why does it matter which one of you made that claim? The fact is there is no evidence for it and you/she did not provide any evidence when you made it originally which I pointed out. You trying to spin that into me being the one who is actually making a claim is absurd and makes you seem pretty dumb, especially the idea of you asking me to prove that there is no evidence as though that is a logical thing to ask someone

>>11648745
>Where did I make anything remotely close to that assertion?
You are backing up someone else that did, same thing

>>11648745
>and that they had generally fuck all effect here >>11648604
o, you said they had no effect if consumed in moderation, saying that drinking them a lot would have an effect, for which you provided no evidence

>>11648745
>you’re all insecure dichotomizing faggots
What does this possibly mean?

God damn I get sick of people on a fucking computer who are too lazy to do a google search for themselves. It's incredible to me how little effort there is behind it, yet the fags on here make it seem like the end of the world

>>11648771
>claim i was the mastermind behind your baseless autistic tantrums
>”oh so you werent? well that actually doesn’t matter anymore despite being the crux of my argument!!”
Good job

>it becomes my responsibility
Where did I say responsibility? Do you think arguments work in a way in which no evidence should be provided because of some arbitrary designation of responsibility which would actually fall on you?

>Why does it matter which one of you made that claim
Lol you are such a hopeless retard. You just sperged out about WHO made the claim the entire time and about it WHO did it first when YOU made the actual initial claim between us you sub 50 IQ zilch

Are you just changing your standards for an argument whenever you get utterly embarrassed by them? How pathetic

>The fact is there is no evidence for it
Actually the fact is there is evidence for it :)
As your dumb fat ass should know by now. Baseless claims can be dismissed with baseless evidence :)

>>11648781
>You are backing someone else that did
LOL this fucking retard can’t read.

>hops make you a soyboy!!!
>well actually they really don’t the amount that requires it is highly unreasonable to consume

Your retarded fat ass
>this is the exact same thing!!!

>>11648803
>Do you think arguments work in a way in which no evidence should be provided because of some arbitrary designation of responsibility which would actually fall on you?
Note when you posted this
>>11648637
Now you are saying exactly the opposite

Some hispter hyped this one to me, was just okay, wrecked my stomach. Too hoppy+dry for my taste

>>11648803
>make outrageuous claim
>get called out on it
>tell everyone that it is the person calling you out's responsibility to provide evidence, not yours
>repeatedly double down on this bullshit and think it makes you intellectual or something
Alright, you have strayed a bit too far from reddit, you had your fun but time to go home

>>11648783
Yes, in response to a baseless claim that said “there is no evidence for hops yada yada”

Do you fatboys know how to read?

>>11648786
That you’re insecure and think only in dichotomies. Are you genuinely this dull witted or were you even more dull witted in an attempt to make a clever insult?

>>11648828
>and think only in dichotomies
What does this have to do with anything?
What does my security have to do with anything?
Why are you just throwing out random non sequiturs?

>>11648817
Baseless claims can be dismissed with baseless evidence. This is not opposite to saying to arguments ought to have evidence. These can be mutual but you don’t have an argument for anything in this thread so you went for a weak failed zinger

>>11648828
>Yes, in response to a baseless claim that said “there is no evidence for hops yada yada”
Thats was responding to the argument that hops turn you into a women.

You are literally responding to a guy calling someone else for saying an unfounded thing without providing evidence (because such evidence does not exist), by saying they cannot call someone else out for not using evidence without using evidence of there being no evidence. Do you not see how circular and autistic this is? You are literally trying to do the thing you are saying cannot be done in support of the original baseless claim

>>11648825
>make outrageuous claim
>get called out on it
>tell everyone that it is the person calling you out's responsibility to provide evidence, not yours

Ah, I see you’re a bit retarded. Because the only time I previously mentioned responsibility was saying that it was an arbitrary bullshit designation >>11648803

The only person whining about responsibility was your fellow sperg here >>11648771

Easy mistake to make for someone as stupid as yourself. No worries

>>11648832
>What does this have to do with anything?
Because people are branching me saying “hops have many phytoestrogen but are not potent” to saying “hops turn you into a soyboy!!” perhaps you need a bit of aid in keeping up with the conversation? Or are you just astounded I don’t always hypothesize you are all just incredibly empty headed?

>>11648834
>Baseless claims can be dismissed with baseless evidence
Thats literally what the original post that made you sperge out was doing. Calling you (I mean totally not you) out for for purporting an unfounded claim without evidence. Then you got mad at there not being any evidence posted to support the fact that your original claim had no evidence t support it, an altogether absurd exercise that you keep doubling down on.

You have truly picked the strangest fucking hill to die on

>>11648859
what does that have to do with either "thinking in dichotomies" or insecurities

Also, you are trying to reframe this. Your original claim was that if you consumed a lot of hops the phytoestregen would turn you into a lady or whatever even though small amounts would not. That is what you were originally called out on. That is the claim that was made and instead of supporting your own claim you said everyone else had to prove that there was no evidence of your claim being true with a bunch of circular logic bullshit

>>11648842
>Thats was responding to the argument that hops turn you into a women.
Yes and? A baseless claim is a baseless claim

>Do you not see how circular and autistic this is?
I do. Sort of the point. It seems you retards don’t since you find it fitting to whine about baseless claims when it suits you I assume? Do you think making baseless claims gets magically absolved because someone else made a baseless claim?

>>11648876
So you are saying I need to prove the absence of evidence supporting your claim, but you can write off my question of your refusal to provide evidence saying I need to provide evidence that you are indeed wrong even though you provided no evidence initially? And you don't see how this is circular?

>>11648876
>state that large amounts of IPA hops have a biological effect on people
>get told there is no evidence for that
>get really mad and autistic asking people to prove a negative

Also keep in mind that saying there is a lack of evidence isn't really making a claim. I importantly did not say "hops do or do not do a specific thing" I only pointed out that your stance lacked support. Also note as you have repeated stated, I should be allowed to argue against your claim without providing evidence because you yourself did not provide any

>>11648860
See. You’re still too much of a butthurt retard operating under the autistic assumption that I made the original claim of hops equal soy despite making a CLEAR distinction of difference in character and thought here >>11648604

But apparently you’re either too butthurt to accept your original premise of me being the author of your original asshurt was untrue thus nullifying your entire actual issue here which is why you’ve now shifted to this meta nonsense. And/or you still haven’t seemed to understand that baseless claims are baseless claims REGARDLESS of who or who isn’t “responsible” for the original argument. You seem to think burden of proof only works when you falsely assume I made the original point. My point is that it doesn’t matter. You make a claim, you OUGHT to back it up, I understand that premise even I haven’t necessarily done so since my original post>>11648604

You seem to think its only fitting when it supports your narratives of responsibility

>>11648912
>You’re still too much of a butthurt retard operating under the autistic assumption that I made the original claim
Its not an assumption. You explicitly made a claim. I said there is no evidence for it, you got mad. Its pretty simple

>>11648872
Im going to break down this down really simply for you especially okay

Me say A, Guy Say B, You say C

To you, me not saying C is like saying B, dat is dichotomy!!!

The insecurity plays into this and the obvious worries you’re so autistically fretting that beer has phytoestrogens and you again dichotomize me into saying “beer means manboobs!!l despite saying nothing of the sort

Ya understand now or???

>>11648912
>You make a claim, you OUGHT to back it up
I didn't make a claim, I called you out for not supporting your claim, which you are somehow spinning into me not supporting a claim so you are absolved of supporting your initial claim

>>11648926
thats a real strained use of the term dichotomy
>obvious worries you’re so autistically fretting that beer has phytoestrogens
So me calling people out for spouting myths means I am insecure that the myth is actually true? Thats quite a stretch

>>11648891
You make a claim, you need to support it. Just because your claim requires more work does not absolve it for being baseless

If i said there is no evidence of water existing. Would you find it suitable for me to then provide no evidence and say “i dont have to do anything!! proving the absence of evidence is silly!!!”

The fact your response to “provide evidence” is that “well that’s circular” shows that you’re too dumb to get the point or you think it’s only an acceptable standard when it fits your argument

>>11648908
>state there is no evidence for something without evidence

>get a counter claim in response with no evidence

>well only you need evidence to argue anything!!!

Ftfy

>Also keep in mind that saying there is a lack of evidence isn't really making a claim
What is it then? A commandment from God? We’re back to square one of you pretending standards of evidence assertion only apply to people that aren’t you

I understand that you OUGHT to provide evidence for any claim, regardless if someone else hasn’t. Do you understand this or not?

>>11648924
>You’re still too much of a butthurt retard operating under the autistic assumption that I made the original claim
>Its not an assumption. You explicitly made a claim.

Two completely different things. Read and try again

Read this mantra
You OUGHT to provide evidence for your claims regardless of someone else hasn’t
Do you agree?

>>11648930
>I didn’t make a claim
Ah, square one of “my claims don’t require evidence because you said it first!!” which again is fallacious enough but self defeating under the false presumption i made THE original claim, not that it even matters if i did

>thats a real strained use of the term dichotomy
Not really. You’re quite stupid so you just don’t understand. I forgive you

>So me calling people out for spouting myths means I am insecure that the myth is actually true
Nope. That is your generalization that I just refuted, you’re making quite a stretch on something I just thoroughly explained :)

>>11648987
>>11648938

Beerfaggots completely and totally metaphysically fucked sideways by basic critical thinking, logic, and reasoning

>>11648818
Yeah most trappist ales are really overhyped.

>>11648987
Nah, you just can't handle the logic. You can't just say you didn't say what you said and everyone has to prove something wrong that you apparently never said to begin with

>>11649090
>no its nor fair!!! i have to accept my self-defeating irrationality!!! you have to have said one thing and then another completely borderline contradicting one!!!

Big yikes there buddy.

>>11649117
You got me, hops actually do cause men to turn into women in large quantities. I must have been wrong the entire time

>>11649124
Oh so now we’ve entered the stage where you’ve essentially conceded how your axiom is incredibly stupid and self-defeating so now you just strawman. How adorable :)

>>11649141
so your whole schtick is that other people cannot call out your unsupported claim without trying to prove a negative because you in fact did not make the claim to begin with?

>>11649019
We're wasted half the time, what do you expect?

>>11649141
You are arguing like a religious person. Try replacing your argument that hops cause you to turn into a women with God existing
>God exists
>>there is no evidence that a god exists
>actually God does exist because you failed to prove that there is a lack of evidence of god existing
What is anyone supposed to do with this insane level of autism you present us with?

You make a claim without evidence and yet claim you can negate anyone calling you out on it by saying they didn't provide evidence for you lack of evidence

>>11649160
Im trying to figure out if you’re still flip flopping between “you made the original claim which necessitates burden!!” or “the burden is on me yes, but that doesn’t matter because my outrageous claim is a negative”

So again, if I baselessly claim that water doesn’t exist and justify not supporting this viewpoint by saying “well duh that would be disproving a negative lol xD”

Is that a suitable explanation? Or again do any standards including your own only have consistency when it’s convenient for you?

>>11649186
See, the thing is I didn’t make the original claim which is what you’re again backtracking to, it doesn’t even matter if i did in your fairyland!! It doesn’t!! Because claims require evidence!!

>actually God does exist because you failed to prove that there is a lack of evidence of god existing
So where exactly did I say that the failure to disprove my point made it true? Hmmm you’ll have to think about that one! Or are we going down another made up assumption rabbit hole here where your entire flimsy argument is based on a false premise? That wouldn’t be too good :(

>>11649189
Both, the original burden is obviously on you making the claim. Then telling the person calling out your absence of evidence to prove it is absurd. You are telling others that they must prove there is no evidence for a stance you are supporting as though that is a logical request

>>11649195
Just because you weren't the very first person to say the thing you are saying doesn't mean the original statement doesn't count

>>11649199
>Both

LMAOOOOOOOO

>THE claim
There is no singular claim. Are we actually rehashing this again?

You OUGHT to provide evidence regardless of someone else hasn’t? Do you agree? If you don’t then I imagine it comes down to PRAYING that I made THE original claim and then saying I went through an instantaneous cognitive dissonance here >>11648561 >>11648604

>>11649189
Note that saying "water does not exist" is not equivalent to saying "there is no evidence to support your claim that water doesn't exist"

There is a significant difference between saying that a claim is false and that there is a lack of evidence for a claim

>>11649217
You can't just say you didn't say what you said originally and expect people to take you seriously

>>11649205
Lol what? So now I get attributed entirely separate borderline contradictory statements I didn’t make because of your unwillingness to be reasonable?

This is really fun guys

>>11649221
Okay, so “there is no evidence water exists, i dont have to support this astounding claim because it is a negative”

Do you find that suitable?

>>11649228
IF person A says something, then person B calls them out for not having evidence, person C can't just come along as B must prove there is an absecne of evidence for A's point that they are supporting

It doesn't matter if you are actually two people or just pretending to if you are taking the same stance in a continuous discussion

>>11649224
You can’t just say I said something when I did while also saying it doesn’t matter if i did because i agreed with the point despite basically contradicting it

This is why im not taking you retards seriously

Again. Do you believe I made some divine cognitive dissonance making these two clear separate thoughts and statements here >>11648561
>>11648604
If you so stupidly believe so why does that make it SUPERIOR for you to make baseless claims?

>>11649235
It may be factually incorrect, but its not taking a stance in an argument if its in response to you making an unfounded claim

Remember, this whole thing is you saying you cannot call out a person making an unfounded claim without literally proving the initial claim wrong even if there was no evidence provided for the initial claim. Somehow in your mind the burden of proof shifts to the 2nd man so long as the initial person comments back pretending to be a third party

>>11649240
>person C can't just come along as B must prove there is an absecne of evidence for A's point that they are supporting
Im not supporting the original point. CLEARLY. And I absolutely can call out baseless claims. Is a claim not baseless because the person they are replying to made a baseless claim? Saying absence of evidence doesn’t mean you didn’t make a baseless claim. Again I pose the question if someone said “there is no evidence of water existing, i do not need to support this because it is not only a negative but i was second :)”

IS that suitable for you?

You OUGHT to provide evidence regardless of someone else hasn’t. Why is this so hard to understand? So far your only alternative is “he was first!!” and we’ve established how fallacious and silly that is.

>>11649247
So really your whole argument is that the initial thing you said you ddn't actually say so its the person calling you out on the thing you totally never said's burden to prove the thing you didn't say incorrect?

>>11649256
You didn’t answer the question

there is no evidence water exists, i dont have to support this astounding claim because it is a negative”

IS THAT SUITABLE

>you making an unfounded claim
IS A BASELESS CLAIM BASELESS REGARDLESS OF YOUR HALLUCINOGENIC FANTASIES YES OR NO

Thoughts on oyster stout? Had a delicious one in my local brewery, made with champagne yeast

>>11649274
Your entire argument is a schizophrenic faith I said something I didn’t while simultaneously saying something contradictory

You justify this viewpoint by claiming a claim is only a claim or needs evidence based on your ever changing arbitrary standards like “first!!!” or the cop out of “well its a negative bro!!

there is no evidence water exists, i dont have to support this astounding claim because it is a negative”

IS THAT SUITABLE

>you making an unfounded claim
IS A BASELESS CLAIM BASELESS REGARDLESS OF YOUR HALLUCINOGENIC FANTASIES YES OR NO

Beer drinkers think there is no evidence that water exists

>>11649300
al of your posts just boil down to "no you"

>>11649300
I just find it interesting that you write off my original comment questioning the evidence of your claim as an improper argument because I didn't attempt to prove that there is no evidence for your original claim. Then you base your whole argument on saying you weren't trying to make a claim to begin with

>>11649325
Seems like you ran out of blanks to shoot there, partner. Better luck next time

>>11649300
You don't think there is a categorical difference between saying "X works like this" and saying "we don't have any evidence suggesting X works like this"?

>>11649332
>you write off my original comment questioning the evidence of your claim as an improper argument because I didn't attempt to prove that there is no evidence for your original claim. Then you base your whole argument on saying you weren't trying to make a claim to begin with
Again, you’re going to have think REALLY hard about where this occurred, reallly hard.

Or are we playing the schizo delusion self defeating flimsy false assumptions card again?

>>11649343
Answer the question

there is no evidence water exists, i dont have to support this astounding claim because it is a negative or first!!”

IS THAT SUITABLE

>you making an unfounded claim
IS A BASELESS CLAIM BASELESS REGARDLESS OF YOUR HALLUCINOGENIC FANTASIES YES OR NO

>>11649354
No, I indeed believe there is water

>>11649360
Answer the question

there is no evidence water exists, i dont have to support this astounding claim because it is a negative or first!!”

IS THAT SUITABLE

>you making an unfounded claim
IS A BASELESS CLAIM BASELESS REGARDLESS OF YOUR HALLUCINOGENIC FANTASIES YES OR NO

>This thread
I've never seen autism this advanced before.

>>11649396
I am saying that that is not as strong a claim as simply saying "water does not exist", the fact that it is factually incorrect doesn't change that

Saying there is no evidence is a comment on someone else's claim, not making a claim yourself. In this case it happens to be factually incorrect, but that doesn't change anything

>>11649427
Answer the question

there is no evidence water exists, i dont have to support this astounding claim because it is a negative or first!!”

IS THAT SUITABLE

>you making an unfounded claim
IS A BASELESS CLAIM BASELESS REGARDLESS OF YOUR HALLUCINOGENIC FANTASIES YES OR NO

>Saying there is no evidence is a comment on someone else's claim, not making a claim yourself
THAT IS A CLAIM, THIS IS REAL LIFE NOT YOUR FAIRY TALE WORLD WHERE EVERY ARGUMENT GETS SHIFTED TO YOUR STANDARDS WHEN IT FITS YOU

>>11649441
I already answered, I definitely think water is real

>>11649441
Dude, you are the one who has repeatedly stated
>>11648637
"Claims with no evidence can be dismissed without evidence"

>>11649459
That’s not the question, try reading this veeeeery sloooooowly

there is no evidence water exists, i dont have to support this astounding claim because it is a negative or first!!”

IS THAT SUITABLE

>you making an unfounded claim
IS A BASELESS CLAIM BASELESS REGARDLESS OF YOUR HALLUCINOGENIC FANTASIES YES OR NO

>>11649465
You’re either entirely missing the point of my question or

>>11649465
You’re either entirely missing the point of the question or you just realized the premise of:

You OUGHT to provide evidence regardless of someone else hasn’t

Which again leads into IS A BASELESS CLAIM A BASELESS CLAIM REGARDLESS OF WHO WHAT WHERE AND WHY

All water is wet, Steve creates water, therefore Steve’s water is wet. DOES THAT FOLLOW

>>11649466
Oh, sorry. I suppose I should say that yes, I believe that there is evidence for water existing

>>11649475
You whole thing was trying to dismiss without evidence my original questioning of your lack of evidence

>>11649486
>god exists
>>there is no evidence that god exists
>prove there is no evidence that god exists
Do you think this is a legitimate arguing technique?

>>11649502
Not the question. Read it slowly

>>11649506
>>11649486

>>11649510
there is no evidence water exists, i dont have to support this astounding claim because it is a negative or first!!”

IS THAT SUITABLE

>you making an unfounded claim
IS A BASELESS CLAIM BASELESS REGARDLESS OF YOUR HALLUCINOGENIC FANTASIES YES OR NO

>>11649519
You got me, hops must indeed cause you to become a lady because water exists. I see so clearly now

>>11649532
Strawmanning and schitzing yet again. Congrats :)

>>11649519
Let's make this more general for you .
If someone makes an outrageous claim with no evidence (especially because no such evidence exists), is it not a proper response for a person B to point out said lack of evidence? Do you seriously then think person B must somehow prove said lack of evidence for it to be a legitimate comment on person A's claim?

>>11649546
there is no evidence water exists, i dont have to support this astounding claim because it is a negative or first!!”

IS THAT SUITABLE

>you making an unfounded claim
IS A BASELESS CLAIM BASELESS REGARDLESS OF YOUR HALLUCINOGENIC FANTASIES YES OR NO

>>11649564
If you claim water exists, and I say there is no evidence for that, the proper response from you would be to provide evidence of water, not to say I must prove the lack of evidence of water

>>11646250
Just bought a few of these and a few 12 oz coopers extra stouts, the stout is really good but it's not worth $1.70 a bottle, the aventinus is good but it tastes like every other german doppelbock(erdinger, ayinger, paulaner, franziskaner dunkel etc...) it all starts to taste the same over time.

>>11649581
there is no evidence water exists, i dont have to support this astounding claim because it is a negative or first!!”

IS THAT SUITABLE

>you making an unfounded claim
IS A BASELESS CLAIM BASELESS REGARDLESS OF YOUR HALLUCINOGENIC FANTASIES YES OR NO

It literally does not matter who was on first. Is ia baseless claim a baseless claim? Your entire argument again goes back to an irrelevant false fantasy i made the original claim

BASELESS CLAIMS ARE BASELESS YES OR NO

>>11649615
If you want to make a claim, back it up, don't expect the people doubting you to to have the burden of proving there is not evidence for your claim

>>11649622
It’s AMAZING you literally cannot answer yes or no if a baseless claim is a baseless claim

>you want to make a claim, back it up
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

WHAT DO YOU THINK IVE BEEN ARGUING THIS WHOLE TIME

Or do you actually think only the people you’re arguing AGAINST should be held to this standard?

>MUH ARBITRARY BURDEN
THAT DOESNT MAKE YOUR BASELESS CLAIM NOT BASELESS DUMBASS

AND YOU STILL have to pretend in your schitzy fairy world that I made the original claim to begin with. Once you realize yet again that i didn’t you need to flip flop back to

>well my claims dont need evidence cuz its a negative!!!

>>11649635
context matters

>>11649638
In other words

“i can make baseless claims when it fits the narrative”

That’s enough sophist smashing for the day, I tire of repeating that X is always X MEANS X is always X

>>11649644
no one said that

Thanks for killing my thread, guys.

>120 replies
>20 posters
get a grip, lads

>>11649664
>>11649672
Christmas break

>>11649708
Its saturday

>>11649722
Christmas break for college kids

>>11649664
That was his intent. It was literally one sharia christian prohibitionist /pol/tard pretending to argue with himself to derail a discussion of fucking beer.

>>11649737
I mean college kids don't have classes on saturdays regardless

>>11649755
Dont need to study or work. I just assume anyone with this much to prove over absolutely nothing is some 20 something college kid

>>11649664
Fuck those faggots, post BEER.

Had this recently, if you can deal with the bitterness the flavor is bretty gud.

Anybody try this?

Got a 4 pack of this for my friend for christmas. Never tried any of their stuff but the liquor store I go to flies through the shit so I figured itd be alright

>>11649854
Nah but I've heard great things. Belgians do christmas ales really fucking well. A lot of American christmas ales are a mess and it's frustrating as hell

>>11649862
WRONG.

>>11648637
>>11648803

What's /beer/'s opinion on pic?

>>11649664
>>11649782
>yup

>>11650423
The variants are kind of a half assed attempt at capitalizing on craft beer, but the original is serviceable. If you are in a bar with nothing but macros you can do worse.

Some of today's fresh acquisitions.

>>11650498
Also enjoyed an Almanac Strawberry and Basil with lunch/brunch post can release. Great early day sour ale.

>>11650423
BM is my go to at a local nacho joint. I'd like to try the summer honey

>>11650520
>BM
>nacho joint
the jokes write themselves

More beer.

>>11649854
I think it's their best beer

>calling fruity fizzy pop beer

>leaving civilization for 6 months
>only stout available will be Guinness
I like Guinness, but I'm still going to miss this stuff. Malty and nowhere near as filling.

>>11652408
a lot of wacky foreign places sell foreign extra stout which is the best guinness so you might be in luck

>>11652434
Not actually going to another country, just the middle of nowhere where everything has to be flown in by plane. There is one bar. They have Guinness Draught, Guinness Blonde, Kronenbourg 1664 and the rest is piss.

>>11652503
Fly in some malt extract and hops and brew your own in a bucket.

>>11650519
basil sour is still to this day one of the best hangover cure I've found

>>11652676
my first try at hoppin frog beers (I have DORIS and TORIS sitting in the cellar for more than a year but couldn't find the occasion to pop them)
brown ales aren't what I like the most usually, but this is still excellent, not overly hoppy, a tad toffee-y and roasty in the end
would recommend

How the fuck do people drink sours? I picked one up and it was like drinking lemon juice vinegar.

>>11652408
This beer is everywhere in NY.

>>11653381
It's an acquired taste. I hated them at first too and eventually got around to them. Now they're my favourite style. Also Thornbridge is shite

Beerniggers think there is no evidence that water exists

American beer looks so weird and gimmicky

>>11653464
It's funny because 90 percent of what sells at these breweries are run of the mill pale ales, lagers, and esbs. This is bottle shop dickwaving and local specials.

Tried a local version of the Resilience IPA today. Pretty much as expected given that the recipe calls for only Centennial and Cascade hops (it's a fundraiser beer). Good on Monkish for skipping the crystal malt and making it as good as possible. I still passed on getting a growler fill of it. Will buy a six of the Sierra Nevada version when it hits distribution next month.

>>11646250
>tfw all beer tastes like death
i hate phenylthiocarbamide.

>>11653913
I'm sorry you lost the genetic lottery, Anon. Does cilantro taste like soap to you as well?

>>11653923
not sure, i once ate some rice with a fresh green herb that tasted like soap so i assume it was cilantro.

i also drank some elderflower tea and it was the worst thing i have ever tasted.

>>11653913
Ciders, meads, and gruits okay, anon?

>>11653464
There are over 7000 craft breweries in the country, most making several dozen beers in a given year you you can find almost anything.

The most common strains are:
Really simple, with maybe only one color differentiating the different labels of the brewery (a subset of that one is abstract or geometric art) like Evil Twin
"extreme" stuff, especially popular in breweries started in the early 00s, exemplified by Three Floyds. These are usually the worst ones

More rustic or homey images, this ones kind of harder to explain but like Founders or Sierra Nevada

The one thing most directly try not to do is invoke macro brewer imagery, to avoid being associated with such flavorless beer (though often brewers will roll out a single limited beer referencing such imagery)

I paid almost 9 dollars for this, what am i in for?

>>11654580
9x the PBR experience.

>>11654580
3 will get you a special kind of drunk reserved for high gravity monsters. It's like a fruity girl drink for men. Probably too heavy on the coffee flavor, but hopefully a creamy body to make up for it.

>>11654957
>It's like a fruity girl drink for men
Its funny that big coffee stouts are a manly version of a fruity girl drink when regular coffee is such a womanly drink

>>11654580
It's a decent stout, but I've found the coffee flavor weak. If you want something with a stronger coffee taste, pic related would be better.

>>11655163
>>11654957
is it normal for imperial stouts to be so.. lacking in carbonation?

>>11655179
yes, typically imperial stouts, and high ABV beers in general are less carbonated than low ABV beers for reasons of chemistry I believe

>>11655209
hrm, shame, i think i'd like the imperial stouts better if they were as carbonated as belgian ales. the stouts taste too 'syrupy' for me.

It's been a few years since I've used /ck/. There used to be a regular beer/wine brewing thread back then. Is it gone now? Do people here still brew?

>>11655317
there are fairly regular homebrew threads

West Coast life

>>11654037
haven't drank those, but i can drink cognac and whiskey. spiced black rum tasted weird however.

>>11653381
don't listen to the other guy. sours are not an acquired taste for most folks, you either immediately love them or hate them.

Gonna celebrate christmas with my first bottle of Westvleteren, happy holidays to you all.

>>11655163
>>11654580
Pic related is my personal favorite coffee stout. Very solid.

Summer in Australia, this quenches the thirst.

I'm going to bring this to the family dinner (going to take the train in 2 hours). I hope they'll like it

goddamit I want a drink but I don't wanna encourage shops to put people to work on Christmas

>>11656861
your decisions don't matter, just do it. Especially at a grocery store, thats gonna be open chirstmas eve regardless of whether people are drinking

>>11655214
That reminds me of the time I found an extremely syrupy stout, felt like I was downing dark chocolate syrup. It was fucking shit

>>11655214
maybe you should try the Ten Fiddy from Oskar Blues, it's carbonated, almost in a soda-ish way

Legendary

Tried this stuff yesterday. Really happy with all the quality pilsner that comes out of this state. Summits is a bit cheaper and just as good though, so I'd still pick that. Especially since it comes in 12 packs

>>11657738
Its always funny when I see west coasties complain about how everything is only IPA, when I have only ever known a wide variety of styles to be very readily available

>>11657808
Same. Makes me feel spoiled desu

>>11657808
Depends on location and where they shop. Some distributors are shit, some anons don't shop around different stores, some stores are ridiculously IPA heavy. I'm on the east coast and feel the sting sometimes when I try to branch out of ale. Not that I blame them, some shit just doesn't sell no matter how good it is.

This was my first time trying these types of beer. It tasted pretty good, like mangos or something.

Merry Christmas you cumlords

>>11649855
Why do Americans sometimes have these autistic pictures on their craft beers? Like wizards and dragons n shit

How generic are the Sierra Nevada pale ales? I'm an Aussie, and I only really drink my local stuff, never heard of this brand before and tried one today, and I'm enjoying it a little too much. Also had the hazy little one ipa, and that one is amazing.

>>11660869
They set a standard for West coast IPA back in the day, now they're one of the largest microbreweries. They ARE the piney and floral IPA, it's hard to call it generic when they more or less popularized the genre. Now, they're too big to play the game like local breweries do but still put out stuff you can enjoy at a shitty bar with nothing else on tap. The hazy little thing was good for what it was trying to be.

It's good beer and I like their seasonal rotation. I use it to introduce people to different styles.

Went to my parents' place for Christmas Eve and cracked this open. It's not my favorite style, but AleSmith just seems to hit the mark with everything they do.

Took a dusty one out of the cellar, smells very rich of coffee but it's still too cold to taste like anything yet.

>>11660965
It honestly smells and tastes like soy sauce, almost makes me regret spending 7 whole bucks on this bottle

>>11660976
How fucking long were you cellaring it?

>>11660994
I don't remember honestly, so probably very long.

>>11660965
I wish they carried this year round in my town: (

>>11661025
It isn't year round anywhere...

>>11660976
Now that it's a few degrees warmer, it's effervescent and tastes like bourbon, not much else though

>>11661052
Oh.

Anyone else like the stuff from Shepherd Neame?

>>11662302
Shepard Neame are pretty reliable. Never had anything from them that really blew me away but you can safely order a pint with the knowledge you're more likely to enjoy it than not. Same with Fullers.

coming home late from family gathering, it's a bit freezing outside, perfect time for this one

The fuck is a provision ale?

>>11663020
A meme ale.

>>11663020
you can just age it

Does beer give you a beerbelly even with a healthy lifestyle?

>>11663145
calories in calories out. having like 2-3 beers is like having a extra meal.

>>11663145
No. Itll keep a little extra fat on you if you drink it often, but nothing substantial

>>11646250
>edgy art and swear words on the can/bottle

>>11648667
shit talk on 4chan creates adverse estrogenic activity. I don't have to prove this true, you have to prove me wrong!!!!!

>>11663406
Kys

>>11663460

>drinking beer made in america
glad that isn't me!

>>11663829
most of the best beer is made in America

>>11663829
how is it possible that there are still people who think the only breweries in America are still just the shit macrobreweries?

>>11646250
IDK, mate I'm kind of a beer dolt, I just get piss water, but my go to to impress ladies is just any bar with fresh beer on tap.

How did you get the job mate, do they take beginners?

>>11663932
because they live in Europe and don't know much about beer. Based on my time in Europe it seemed most middle aged and older people were genuinely unaware of craft beer. Honestly most continental Europeans have never had a stout or IPA or any ale style besides Belgians which seemed to be most people's only exposure to good beer

>>11663939
Any company will hire trainees, but you'll have to travel to their office. The better known companies are Ingram and Marquette, they're both based in Kentucky.

>>11663946
Not to mention Germans and Czechs' obsession with pilsners. I mean I get they're really drinkable, but to me they taste like corn and feet.

>>11663932
This. It honestly makes me sperg.

>>11664085
Yeah, part of their problem is that their cheap base tier lager is considerably better than cheap lager elsewhere so many of them have never even considered trying to find something better, and there is a bit of nationalistic pride and marketing behind their lagers so they definitely aren't looking to find better stuff when most of it is made elsewhere.

I did find the Czechs to be more open minded about it than the Germans though, thats for sure. The Czechs even seem to be further along in their own craft brewing industry than Germany

>>11664085
Then you have a shit palate

>>11664149
Of course I do.

>>11660965
This picture is aids and cancer rolled up into one.

>>11660937
Their ipa blows ass. Other stuff is good tho

>>11664305
Their IPA is great, though. Had pic related while cooking Christmas dinner.

>>11661157
sounds very disappointing.

>>11650137
>$12 USD for a 12 oz. bottle

I'd rather just fork over the $20 bucks or so for a four pack of Bernardus and get quadruple the amount of beer. I love prairie, but that shit's just ridiculous.

>>11660937
>>11664372
What is going to happen to those ducks?

>>11665648
I don't get it very often because I love it so much, so the price doesn't bother me.

>>11664372
I thought it was way too bitter. Even for an IPA. Overwhelming.

>>11665790
It's only 73 IBU, and is incredibly well balanced. Sounds like you drank an expired bottle.

>>11665822
I didnt even check the date. It was in my friends fridge and he said I could have it so maybe.

>>11663020
you can age it

Had a Westvleteren 12
Honestly best beer I drank so far. Really balanced but not overly heavy like some Belgian trappist beers. Couldn't put down the glass

>>11646257
i had this recently. i liked it.

>>11646250
I just bought pic related. I'm trying it for the first time. I think it's pretty good. Kinda malty and citrusy, but not super bitter. I like it.

One of the best around me.

>>11667066
too far from TN to probably get any of that.
i'd like to try it one day. give me a pic with the color of the pour, please?

>>11646250
The Belgian-ish 3.5 was a great success. What should I make next? I'm feeling some darkness, but I'll turn to the light if someone gives me some good ideas.

>>11667516
do a coffee stout.
wee heavy or a fucking tripel.

>>11667516
do an imperial red ale.

>>11667594
>>11667600
The churning nonsense in the bucket is basically a cross between an imperial red and a tripel. It turned out that to get the flavours I was after, I had to add some sugar to it, which brought the end result a bit above what a tripel should be. It worked out to be about somewhere between 15 and 18 SRM with a sharp ruby shine to it, and (allowing for error and variance) about 9.5% ABV.

Definitely thinking a stout... might skip on the coffee, or just emulate it with a bit of dark crystal and a 50/25/25 chocolate, roast barley, and black malt mix on the last half pound or so.

>>11653878
Have to drink it within 1 day? What a volatile beer.

>>11667801
... carbonation is dependent upon pressure - basically keeping CO2 in solution as carbonic acid. Once that bottle's opened, and the pressure is released, the carbon dioxide becomes atmospheric in the bottle, and once opened again, atmospheric in the room.

So yeah, if you want an effervescent beer from a pop-top bottle, you're best to drink it within a day - better yet, in one sitting.

>>11667662
make a fucking oc post, friend.
try coffee stout, if you can muster it.
i'd pour what a friend of mine made lately, but i've got some elysian left to drink, and i'm saving one or two of his for the new year.
please make a homebrew thread when you do your next brew.

>>11667855
how can i achieve the thick creamy head on a proper stout or imperial stout without ending with foaminess or thin short-lived heads?

>>11667862
I actually got a metric assload of coffee for Christmas - it's just that this is when the breweries in town do their coffee porters and stouts. I need to go see what my home boy's up to in the East end, which basically means I'm coming home with a case of cleverly labelled coffee something, and he's getting a few bottles of the 3.5.

I'm just working out (in my head... because real math is for nerds... and for me, later) how and what I'd need to add to balance out a semi-smokey, somewhat fruity medium-dark coffee... probably just a few grams of calcium carbonate.

>>11667886
ahhhhh. i got you.
save some coffee then. do apricot porter or something goofy.
pecan pie ale?

>>11667882
If you are thinking like Guinness, that uses nitrogen instead of carbon dioxide

Got this, and the willettized coffee stout

>>11667898
im thinking like creamy head instead of foam.
we're not going to use N over naturally occurring C02

>>11667909
that pint looks badass.
second post was badass beer to me. i got it in whole foods.
i like homemade stout though.
i cant wait for my red ale. we have the grains and i have the honey. it's gonna be fun.
show me some of your past beers?

>>11667882
long story short - body, with an alternate ending of nitrogen+CO2.

short story long -
>"thicker" malts, higher in proteins and unfermentable sugars, such as high-L crystal malts, wheat, or carafoam
>a hotter, thicker mash to leave more unfermentable sugars due to less long-chain conversion, while still giving a good yield
>High alpha acid hops for bittering... not sure why it works, but I have way better head retention with less of the cutting edge guys in my first 15 mins of boil than the equivalent of say an EKG. Aroma hops don't seem to make a huge difference.
>minimal oxygen introduction after primary fermentation
>really clean serveware. No soap residue, nor grease.

If you're bottle conditioning, they're probably going to be foamy. You can try for a lower carbonation, but I find anything less than 2.5 atm doesn't turn out right.

>>11667912
I think part of it is protein content, I also think a lot of good stouts use some oats for this purpose as it has a higher protein content than barley

>>11667922
so we should set the grainfather to lower for longer for our application?

>>11667922
also, we are notoriously clean. i don't wipe the fermentation vessel with vinegar like i would were i whipping up some meringue. but it's clean.
i think i get you. you put it into terms that i understand.
thanks.

>>11667927
higher... for shorter if anything. Less water in the mash, higher temp (158F ish). 45-60 mins give or take. No protein rest.

Never used one, so not sure what sort of settings it has, but they seem pretty sophisticated.

>>11667922
we have a great method for not over aerating the first rack also.
i think i have what i need.
i'll post OC if you don't make a thread first.

>>11667934
OH right.
So we're using less water and treating the end product like it's a certain candy stage with sugar to achieve a certain kind of head.

it will be art and science before he stops brewing and i'm just becoming interested in making it a new hobby.
thanks for your time.

>>11667938
I've got a limited amount of bottles left... Either I have to drink about 5gal of the high test, or about 5gal of Hacker Pschorr within 10-14 days of brew day.

>>11667944
Not so much a "candy stage"... just a higher conversion/mash temp to ensure that you have some dextrins and longer chain sugars that your yeast can't ferment, to give you a higher FG/bigger body. You can actually use less sugar for priming a heavier beer - most stouts aren't very effervescent at all, but I've found that anything under an expected 2.5atm (so, roughly 3.5oz dextrose for a bottle-carbonated 5gal batch) doesn't feel right.

>>11667909
I hated this stout

>>11646250
>Not brewing your own hooch aboard

Is there such a thing as a truly sweet beer without a bittering agent? I absolutely hate the "bite" meme and have no idea why anyone would want to make their drink less pleasant to drink. I usually tend to prefer wheat beers, because in my mind beer is supposed to taste like liquid bread, and wheat beers at least usually have a taste that isn't gasoline. But even they incorporate hops. There's such a thing as a beer without hops (gruit), but gruit just uses other bittering agents like herbs instead.

>>11668051
Barleywine.

>>11668055

Thanks!

I started playing around on brewersfriend... I think the next batch is going to be a black-forest stout. German yeast, a good amount of light-chocolate malt (with some roast/black to blacken it up), and some cherries.

>>11668051
Probably some sort of table beer.

>>11668051
It's do-able, just usually quite sweet. Something like a dessert stout could do without bittering entirely (relying on dark malts for bitterness), but a lighter beer would be quite sweet indeed without hops/gruit if there were any body to it.

>>11668051
belgian beers use aged hops which have lost most of their bitterness

>>11668051
Not everybody thinks bitterness is unpleasant

I think we all know that the best beer in the galaxy is Pabst Blue Ribbon™

>>11668102
I think if your pasta ages any further, we might try to ferment it.

is al/ck/, dare i say it, back?

>>11668133
In many ways it never left.

hey guys, hops-has-estrogen anon here, from earlier. you may remember my epic backpaddle session. Well...
I totes changed my mind, hops definitely makes you sprout ladyparts.
Prove me wrong!

>>11668133
no, beer threads have always been here

>>11668154
I could probably use some estrogen to be honest. I don't have raging steroid jaw or anything, but I'm definitely an overgrown sasquatch.

>>11668028
Yeah, not very good. I am hoping willettized coffee stout will be better

>>11668355
I've only heard good things. That cappuccino stout was surprising at how bad it was, not that it was the worst stout ever, but they do a pretty okay job with any of their other stouts I think

>>11646250
AGAINST THE GRAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
They make a MEAN barbecue french fires nigga. And that barleywine style of theirs' is deadly
I just finished stocking their fine (expensive (tbqhwyf)) beers on our shelves at the licka stow. . I have one of their hats. Good for you OP. Stop drinking IPA's, faggot. Try their ramen noodle beer.

>>11668067
OI! Don't listen to that fag. Barleywine's are as complex as any woman in their varieties. Don't let them fool you.
But you should try them regardless. You can get a Barleywine that's as milky as the darkest chocolate porter you've ever imagined, and right around the corner you can find one that's as sweet as a peach.

Don't drink a barleywine style ale on the pretense you've posted. You should drink one because they're the best style of beer in the world next to trappist ales and quads. Yeah, they're not as bitter as the rest.
>https://www.thebrewenthusiast.com/ibus/
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer_measurement#Bitterness
>https://beerconnoisseur.com/articles/whats-meaning-ibu
>https://www.google.com/search?q=difference+between+sour+and+bitter&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1

>>11646250
I'm from Louisville and was excited to see this beer. I love it.

>>11668998
>You should drink one because they're the best style of beer in the world next to trappist ales and quad
Barelywine > trappists and quads

Barleywine is literally the best style of beer in the world. The only thing better than barleywine is a barrel aged barelywine.

>>11668068
that sounds badass.

>dad recently got into homebrewing and is pretty good at it
>drink all the homebrews I want when I visit family over the holidays
Comfy

guinness have been doing a variety of porters and stouts and they're genuinely pretty good
the milk stout and XX are surprisingly solid

>>11671592
They are trying to hold back the upcoming influx of American style craft breweries in Europe

>>11671605
I've got nothing against american craft breweries but the only american stuff we get here is hopped to hell and back, so they all just kind of taste like grapefruit and pine. I wish we got some of the stouts I'm seeing in this thread, but I guess americans quite rightly want to keep the best stuff for themselves.

>>11671628
I mean more that I am pretty sure American style craft breweries are gonna become pretty big in much of Europe in the not too distant future, and Guinness is trying pretty hard to stay ahead of the curve. The big guys in American were utterly unprepared for it and have lost over 20% of their market to craft brewers and Diageo has learned from it

As far as actual American craft breweries, the segment that gets exported is super random it seems like, I don't think much of the best stuff is easy to find but occasionally I am surprised

>>11671592
Good, because that IPA they made was godawful

>>11669475
I'm kind of hemming and hawing at the German ale yeast... I'll have to age it longer as the sulfurous component to half-lager yeasts is going to bring forward the hops, and will probably clash with the black malt a little bit. That, combined with German efficiency means I'll have a lighter bodied stout - just a strong black ale really. The only way around that would be to do a second mash of just flaked wheat and barley.

If I use an appropriate Irish/English ale yeast, or something tailored for stouts, I could get something a bit milder, but with a much fuller body.

Hemm... Haw...

I've been malt extract brewing beer for a while with 5 gallon carboy, bucket, and kettle for brewing. I'm looking into brewing cider next month, and I was wondering if I can brew it with this setup. I'm also open to any suggestions and tips on how to brew cider successfully.

>>11671834
I've definitely done it. I'd suggest any tubing be replaced - siphons, hoses - so you have one for beer and one for cider, as sometimes cider can get a little sour on you.

You do need to boil cider to help keep your biome clean, but not for a full hour, or you'll break down most of what's making it cidery. At least 5 mins. At most 20. Choose an appropriate yeast (saison will not be your friend here, but champagne might. White labs produces a "real" cider yeast, a "fake" one, and a "What are you thinking?" one).

Resist the urge to add fruit after the boil, unless it's been boiled/sanitized. Cider will grow friends really quickly up until the yeast takes hold.

>>11668051
Try scotch ales.

>>11671847
Thanks. To be honest, I haven't been looking too much into the brewing process for cider process, but I'll take this into account.

What sources I have looked at say that I need 6 gallon containers, but it sounds like it could work with 5 gallon ones if I scale the recipe.

>>11672587
You need 6 because it can be a very vigorous fermentation. Not so much for secondary, but it will make a nasty mess in primary.

>>11672594
Specifically primary in a glass carboy.

>>11646250
imperial stout is sure comfy af to drink in the winter months. oatmeal coffee imperial stout is even comfier, especially with oatmeal raisin cookies.

>>11672619
It's called Wake n Bake now, anon, get with the times.

>>11672594
>>11672610
Depends on the yeast strain, but yeah, if you're using a small airlock, you want some headroom. I suggest a wide-bore blowoff tube.